64gb boot drives

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

computeguy

Honorable
Feb 26, 2013
66
0
10,630
I'm going to by an SSD boot drive some time in the future to accompany my hard drive. Obviously, OS is going to be installed on there, but what else? What else do people usually put on there? Only things that are on the SSD boot drive will receive the SSD performance increase, right? So, putting the OS on there will give it faster boot time, and putting a game on there will give it faster load time?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
mcnumpty23

mcnumpty23

Polypheme
Jul 15, 2011
15,519
0
66,960
yes
but ssd prices are falling

so personally i would try to go for a 128gb ssd

not a fan of putting the OS on a small ssd and programs on a second mechanical drive

there are tweaks to get more space on your ssd

such as lower the pagefile and delete hyberfil.sys file
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ronintexas

ronintexas

Judicious
Dec 10, 2012
5,911
0
32,960
Windows 7 typically takes 12-20GB (up to 1/3 of the drive space) of a 64GB SSD. You could install a few programs on it (most used programs), but you would be limited to what could be installed to the SSD. 128/256GB is the way to go, as you will want a majority of your programs installed to the SSD...

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
R

ram1009

Distinguished
Jun 28, 2007
3,421
0
21,160
All of my SSDs are 256GB. IMHO, 128GB is a minimum for a boot drive. If you're buying an SSD for the performance increase you're likely to be disappointed. I was. As you point out, the only time you notice the difference is booting and game level launch. After a few days you won't even notice that. Reliability is the real reason to use an SSD.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bgunner

bgunner

Judicious
Feb 13, 2009
5,144
14
32,515


this I dis agree with. As reliability goes a plater drive is much more reliable for longevity. SSD's only give just so many reads and writes before the section becomes unusable.

I use a 60GB boot drive. After moving all user files and page files off the SSD I ended up with 35 GB or so free to install a very few programs I use the most. I agree with everyone saying go for a bigger SSD 120GB minimum.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
J_E_D_70

J_E_D_70

Splendid
Mar 21, 2012
7,294
59
30,290
I could not disagree more about not noticing level load times. It is night and day. Will never launch games from a mechanical again (had a Raptor before). Sometimes I couldn't even read the text on the Skyrim loading screen because the areas loaded so fast. In BF3 I can select kit and still be waiting on the countdown timer, not playing catch up. That is pure win. And I'm on an *old* SSD. I'd go at least 128GB, more likely 180+.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

computeguy

Honorable
Feb 26, 2013
66
0
10,630



I think he meant performance increase in general with an SSD, which, I agree, is practically non-existent. Load time, however, I know are very different. It would be smart to get, say, a 128gb SSD and store my OS and games that are notorious for longer load time, like Skyrim (or any RPG, really), on there, seeing as I won't be able to fit all of my games on 128gb.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
edogawa

edogawa

Splendid
Jan 4, 2012
2,890
0
21,460


Yes, they are a lot faster, but not enough to put all your games on a SSD yet. I have all my games on a mechanical drive still, loading anything takes 5-10 seconds at worst.

If you play TF2, COD, PS2, etc every day, than sure put that on your SSD though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
R

ram1009

Distinguished
Jun 28, 2007
3,421
0
21,160


Sorry, but I think you have much to learn about reliability if you think something spinning at 7200RPM is more reliable than something with no moving parts. Electronically, they both have control circuitry that can fail so that's a push. I'm not overly concerned about longevity since I replace all storage drives every 3 years ad recommend others do the same.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bgunner

bgunner

Judicious
Feb 13, 2009
5,144
14
32,515


when the system gets moved a lot like a laptop you are correct. A desk top doesn't get moved as much and not as susceptible to the HDD failure in that way. As I have had HDD's last 10 years and ssd's have not been out for 10 years I'll still put my data on a platter drive verses a SSD any day. Also not every body can afford $800 - $1000 every 3 years Just for storage . I run 1.5TB storage space if you do the math that's a ton of money for SSD replacements.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
edogawa

edogawa

Splendid
Jan 4, 2012
2,890
0
21,460
I'm with bgunner.

SSD are only now becoming mainstream.

HDD are reliable in a desktop since they don't move around alot.

If your data is that critical or important to yourself, you will have it backed up twice anyways.

As long as the platters themselves remain intact, you can repair a drive still and recover the data if the electronics go bad.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom